The Legal Roundup (March 28th — April 3rd)
CrowdJustice’s weekly roundup of law, news and legal tech. This week we discuss how the IP Bill and the FBI v Apple case are connected, couriers fighting for employment rights and new efforts to eliminate jargon from the legal profession.
The IP Bill & FBI v Apple — privacy in an age of technology
On 15 March, the Investigatory Powers Bill was voted through the House of Commons on its second reading. The Bill gives police and intelligence agencies substantial power to intercept communications and collect personal data from internet and phone companies. It has been heavily criticised, including by senior lawyers and the UN special rapporteur on privacy, for breaching international standards in particular in relation to mass surveillance
On the other side of the Atlantic, the six week impasse between Apple and the FBI over accessing the locked iPhone of a terrorist ended when FBI decided to rely on the assistance of a third party to unlock the phone.
The IP Bill on the one hand, and the Apple case on the other, highlight similar questions in an age when we increasingly rely on technology to manage our daily lives. Should the Government have far-reaching power to access private information, like the IP bill provides for, and like the FBI argument in the Apple case seems to imply it ought? Is the US government’s reliance on third party hackers a way of circumventing the outcome of a legal process? Where do we draw the line between security and privacy — and how do individual citizens protect their rights in the face of increasing government oversight?
Watch this space for updates on how the IP Bill progresses. It will next go to a committee, and then to the House of Commons for the report stage and third and final reading.
The National Living Wage and the IWGB couriers case
The National Living Wage came into effect in the UK as part of George Osborne’s budget on Friday 1 April. The day before, four cycle couriers launched a crowdfunding campaign on CrowdJustice in relation to an employment case where they are seeking “basic employment rights”, including a National Living Wage.
The group are arguing that for leading courier companies the industry standard has been to employ couriers as “Independent Contractors” rather than “Employees” — and as a result, they have neither job security nor entitlement to National Minimum Wage, nor other basic employment rights.
Should cycle couriers be entitled to a National Living Wage and other basic employment rights? How is the status of “Independent Contractor” agreed and maintained in low-paid industries? Is this the same as the Uber model that has caused so much friction in different legal jurisdictions? Watch this space: www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/iwgbcouriers
Legal services board urges lawyers to drop jargon
Why do many consumers fail to seek legal advice? According to a report published last week by the Legal Services Board, in addition to the lack of affordable legal services, one of the reasons is legal jargon. The report, aimed at legal professionals and also regulators themselves, brings together a series of examples of how this problem has been addressed in other sectors and suggests that one way to improve this may be to provide lawyers with guides to help them drop legalese.
The need for clearer language is a constant theme in the legal sector. The LSB report was published just after the Government issued a public call to make businesses’ Ts&Cs more “user friendly”.
Have a legal case that could benefit from crowdfunding?
